There you go! But really, I think of this question every time I hear the song. Could their voices have been mixed together; John during the first little bit and then Paul? I agree with what Casbah said about the edginess but toward the end it sounds more ethereal. But when I listen to it again I'll probably think something else!

nimrod

There you go! But really, I think of this question every time I hear the song. Could their voices have been mixed together; John during the first little bit and then Paul? I agree with what Casbah said about the edginess but toward the end it sounds more ethereal. But when I listen to it again I'll probably think something else!

nimrod

Although the overdubs to the middle section were being done separately from the main body of the song, it had already been edited into the fourtrack master, which made Richard's job of dropping in and out a bit tricky. Paul's vocal, for example, was being dropped into the same track that contained John's lead vocal, and there was a very tight drop-out point between the two--between Paul's singing"...and I went into a dream" and John's "ahhh" that starts the next section. Richard was quite paranoid about it--with good reason--and I remember him asking me to get on the talkback mic to explain the situation to Paul and ask him not to deviate from the phrasing that he had used on the guide vocal. I was really impressed when Richard did that--I thought it showed great maturity to be proactive that way. John's vocal, after all, had such great emotion, and it also had tape echo on it. The thought of having to do it again and re-create the atmosphere was daunting...not to mention what John's reaction would have been! Someone's head would have been bitten off, and it most likely would have been mine. But Paul, ever professional, did heed the warning, and he made certain to end the last word distinctly in order to give Richard sufficient time to drop out before John's vocal came back in. Listening carefully, you can actually hear Paul slightly rush the vocal; he even adds a little "ah" to the end of the word "dream" giving it a very clipped ending.

Yes, Geoff Emerick was there but his memory has failed him. That was Paul's part of the song, including the ahhs. The "little 'ah'" following the word "dream" that Geoff Emerick mentioned sounds, to me, like Paul taking a breath before he sings the ahhs. I don't hear any "very clipped ending" at all...

nimrod

I really don't think so Baz, (Engineers don't forget their work ) he wrote pages about the recording of ADITL, even mentioning minute detail like Paul adding the little 'ah' at the end of dream and leaving the little gap, and Richard being very concerned about getting crossover with John's bit......Geoff seems to me to remember it very well.

It can sound like Paul, and it can sound like John, opinion is split, but this from Geoffs book (the actual engineer) confirms who sang the ahhhhhh's

On top of that Geoffs book is very pro Paul, which is ok, but he wouldnt credit something to John, that Paul had done.

On top of that Geoffs book is very pro Paul, which is ok, but he wouldnt credit something to John, that Paul had done.

I don't remember the part about the ahh's (I read the book before I came here and learned about the debate) but I do remember the Paul bias. It was very obvious. He basically acted like he barely knew John.

I don't remember the part about the ahh's (I read the book before I came here and learned about the debate) but I do remember the Paul bias. It was very obvious. He basically acted like he barely knew John.

As an antidote to that read Ken Scott's autobiography. He seemed to like George most of all. He said Paul wanted to be liked by everyone but was very selective to who he returned friendship. He acknowledged Paul's excellence as a musician though.

I must admit I've always assumed it's John. It sounded like it to my ear. But I've never forensically examined it. Giving it a listen in light of what you say the attack on the note sounds like John, but the sustain sounds like Paul.

Unfortunately my YouTube won't let me open your link. Something about it not being available here.

nimrod

As an antidote to that read Ken Scott's autobiography. He seemed to like George most of all. He said Paul wanted to be liked by everyone but was very selective to who he returned friendship. He acknowledged Paul's excellence as a musician though.

Its ok to prefer a Beatle imo, it doesn't bother me at all that Geoff glorifies Paul

Its ok to prefer a Beatle imo, it doesn't bother me at all that Geoff glorifies Paul

Paul deserves glorification

my take from Mark Lewisohn is that he leans toward John

Yes. And it's natural that if one was friendlier toward you than the others than you'd remember that person more fondly in later years. Seems like Paul and Geoff got on well but George and John might not have with Geoff to the same extent. Just normal cut and thrust of working relationships.